2010 NFL Off-Season Rumors and Reports (Week 3)

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Stafford/Sanchez >>>>> Bradford/Clausen

WOW...You're saying they're both worse than Sanchez? Major insult!

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Playing it safe is one way to look at it, but a clear, decisive plan for improvement at our weakest position would be another.

What frustrates me is when people say: let's take a chance on a quarterback. There are a lot of people who have an irrational man crush on Sam Bradford, but at the very least, those people are convinced that if you do get him, the rest will fall into place. And as wrongheaded as I think the logic is, I can respect the sentiment.

If you're "taking a chance" on a guy that high, you're setting your team up for failure, I think. Some people believe the draft is a crapshoot. If the draft is a crapshoot, I don't think a QB at No. 4 can be defensed. You really do have to know what you are getting this high. Which is why, in my mind, taking a chance on Okung is not verbage I'd ever use. I prefer to look at it as finding a way to land the guy who will make us better the fastest.

Umm, I think any and all positions are a crapshoot. No different then Okung having an upside so does Bradford and Clausen. But all the drafties have a down side... no one actually knows how well they will perform in the NFL or with the scheme their team will be running.

[12thMan]

I'm starting to think there's less downside for the Skins to go ahead and draft Clausen, package Campbell et al to move up in the second to draft another tackle, rather than take a Okung or Williams with the first pick and mine for a quality prospect at QB in the later rounds.

I think there might be less room between the top 5-8 tackles than there is between, say, the top 5 quarterback prospects. After Clausen and Bradford are off the boards, a team would have to have done their homework to pin point who's the third best quarterback in the draft, if there is one.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

i think your grades may on stafford and sanchez may be a bit harsh, but the part i bolded is my main point - when a team has a pick this high, they can't afford to screw it up. sure, any player at any position can pose a risk, but clausen and bradford are simply too great of a risk.

So far, the team has played it safe in free agency, and youre suggesting taking chances in the draft? if anything, a team should take chances in free agency (where the risk is always smaller) and play it safe in the draft. you obviously recognize the difference between taking chances and being stupid. Drafting Bradford or Clausen at 4 falls into the later category. Both are reaches in the top 5, and Clausen is a reach in the top 15. I acknowledge that Bradford and Clausen could end up being the next Brady and Manning, but theres a far greater chance they'll end up as busts... especially behind our line. If our team had a solid, established line, playmakers at WR and RB positions, and a proven defense good at generating turnovers, then, the story might be different. But taking a chance on a QB now would be like trying to install a pimp home theater system in a house that didnt have a its foundation, roof, or walls completed yet. we need to build a solid foundation by making smart, calculated, lower risk moves. Once we've done that, then, lets start taking some risks.

I mean no offense but that is precisely the kind of thinking that I don't get. It amounts to:
"We're 4-12. Now is not the time to step up and grab a player who could be a fine franchise QB for years to come."

It seems to me that 4-12 is the perfect time to step up and make bold moves. I just don't get that "we have to play it safe" thinking.

Again, I am not counseling foolhardy stupidity, but calculated, educated risks seem like exactly what we need.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Buster

WOW...You're saying they're both worse than Sanchez? Major insult!

not really. Sanchez got better and better as the seaosn progressed. he'll be a pro-bowlder by his third year... i don't think its smart to make QBs start right away, although it seems thats what alot of teams are doing now.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I'm starting to think there's less downside for the Skins to go ahead and draft Clausen, package Campbell et al to move up in the second to draft another tackle, rather than take a Okung or Williams with the first pick and mine for a quality prospect at QB in the later rounds.

I think there might be less room between the top 5-8 tackles than there is between, say, the top 5 quarterback prospects. After Clausen and Bradford are off the boards, a team would have to have done their homework to pin point who's the third best quarterback in the draft, if there is one.

DING, DING, DING, we have a winner. Thanks to everyone else for playing.

You've articulated in a paragraph what I've been saying for months in multiple posts. Man, I've got to learn how to write. I thought all those classes I was taking at the Firstdown School of Speeling & Grammer were paying off, what a waist.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by slingin sammy 33

ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. Thanks to everyone else for playing.

You've articulated in a paragraph what i've been saying for months in multiple posts. Man, i've got to learn how to write. I thought all those classes i was taking at the firstdown school of speeling & grammer were paying off, what a waist.

lmfao

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I'm starting to think there's less downside for the Skins to go ahead and draft Clausen, package Campbell et al to move up in the second to draft another tackle, rather than take a Okung or Williams with the first pick and mine for a quality prospect at QB in the later rounds.

I think there might be less room between the top 5-8 tackles than there is between, say, the top 5 quarterback prospects. After Clausen and Bradford are off the boards, a team would have to have done their homework to pin point who's the third best quarterback in the draft, if there is one.

I'd be perfectly fine with that. I definitely agree that the difference between Okung to Williams to Bulaga to Davis to Brown to Campbell to Capers is much smaller than say Bradford to Clausen to McCoy.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Buster

WOW...You're saying they're both worse than Sanchez? Major insult!

Especially since most pundits are saying that Bradford is probably the most accurate passer to come out of college since Payton Manning. Maybe it's just me. I haven't heard that about Clausen but I'm beginning to hear nice things about him as well. After those two it's major drop off.

[12thMan]

The other part of the equation: If we're going to take Clausen, again which I'm not totally wild about, I'm okay with Rex Grossman starting on day one and Clausen, who's been in a pro style offense for the past three years, backing him up.

The thing with Rex isn't that he's a horrible quarterback all the time, it's when he's bad he's really bad and when he's good, he makes you think you've just discovered water in a desert. He's like the little girl with the curl, you know

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Ehhhhhh.

I don't know if I'd go that far. I just don't think there's a guy in that bunch I'd support taking in the top five.

If there was one, it'd be Stafford most likely, but dude has some serious accuracy issues with the football that might prevent him from being anything more than passable.

I had a second round grade on Stafford compared to mid-to-late firsts on both Clausen and Bradford, and a fourth on Sanchez. But if there was one guy I would knowingly overdraft based on intangibles, it'd be Stafford (Detroit might have done just this).

Gtripp - im confused on how you evaluate qbs. im starting to think you undervalue the position way too much.

you gave stafford a 2nd round grade - he was drafted 1st overall

sanchez a 4th round grade - he was drafted 5th overall

bradford and claussen a mid-late 1st round grade - bradford is projected to be 1st overall, claussen in the top 10.

in another thread you said its stupid to pick a QB at value. so if you need a qb, theres a qb with a top 5 grade and your picking 4th, you dont pick the qb? b/c that would be picking him at his value?

i get wanting to draft a qb with a pick later than his value but good luck finding that buggy with a porsche engine under the hood. i think every team would love to draft guys later than what they have them graded as is, but while players might slip here or there, its just not realistic.

idk man, just odd how to treat these rookie qbs compared to your assessments of JC.

[Trample the Elderly]

Breaking news: Laron Landry traded for a grilled cheese to Buffalo. (Not the team, but the actual city) Laron will be in charge of the monkey cages at the Buffalo Zoo. His responsibilties include cleaning monkey feces and getting the piss knocked out of him by the gorillas.

Coach Shann-y-han said, quote: "Laron has been a vulgar err . . valuable part of our team, but when a deal like that comes along you just can't let it get away."

General Manager Bruce Allen has denied reports that he has considered trading falling-star RB Clinton Portis for a pack of Kools. "I'm not a big smoker, and I discourage our nation's youth from picking up a nasty habit like cigarettes."

You heard it here first folks.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

Gtripp - im confused on how you evaluate qbs. im starting to think you undervalue the position way too much.

you gave stafford a 2nd round grade - he was drafted 1st overall

sanchez a 4th round grade - he was drafted 5th overall

bradford and claussen a mid-late 1st round grade - bradford is projected to be 1st overall, claussen in the top 10.

in another thread you said its stupid to pick a QB at value. so if you need a qb, theres a qb with a top 5 grade and your picking 4th, you dont pick the qb? b/c that would be picking him at his value?

i get wanting to draft a qb with a pick later than his value but good luck finding that buggy with a porsche engine under the hood. i think every team would love to draft guys later than what they have them graded as is, but while players might slip here or there, its just not realistic.

idk man, just odd how to treat these rookie qbs compared to your assessments of JC.

as far as evaluating absolute best player his rankings could be spot on

there IS an inflation of ranking though due to being a QB, teams need QBs.. there's only 1 of them on the field at any given time typically... so even if a guy is 2nd round talent someone WILL take him in the 1st regardless

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I'm starting to think there's less downside for the Skins to go ahead and draft Clausen, package Campbell et al to move up in the second to draft another tackle, rather than take a Okung or Williams with the first pick and mine for a quality prospect at QB in the later rounds.

I think there might be less room between the top 5-8 tackles than there is between, say, the top 5 quarterback prospects. After Clausen and Bradford are off the boards, a team would have to have done their homework to pin point who's the third best quarterback in the draft, if there is one.

so, basically youre saying that we should reach for clausen to save us from having to do our homework to identify a good QB in the later rounds?

Also, if Clausen doesn't have a high probability of being better than Jason Campbell, a QB who is already on the team, then why a QB at all?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

Gtripp - im confused on how you evaluate qbs. im starting to think you undervalue the position way too much.

you gave stafford a 2nd round grade - he was drafted 1st overall

sanchez a 4th round grade - he was drafted 5th overall

bradford and claussen a mid-late 1st round grade - bradford is projected to be 1st overall, claussen in the top 10.

in another thread you said its stupid to pick a QB at value. so if you need a qb, theres a qb with a top 5 grade and your picking 4th, you dont pick the qb? b/c that would be picking him at his value?

i get wanting to draft a qb with a pick later than his value but good luck finding that buggy with a porsche engine under the hood. i think every team would love to draft guys later than what they have them graded as is, but while players might slip here or there, its just not realistic.

idk man, just odd how to treat these rookie qbs compared to your assessments of JC.

Come again?

The idea behind my projections is not to guess how the draft will value the players, but rather to try to provide an accurate picture of how good the players actually are. Could I find a fourth rounder in this draft capable of doing exactly what Sanchez did last year? Easily. Could I find a second rounder who could do what Stafford did? Of course.

It's all about having perspective. The truth of the matter is that, when it comes to first round quarterbacks, about 2/3rds are going to be less valuable than Jason Campbell. Is their anyway to identify the much better prospects from the much worse prospects? You betcha. When guys (like Bradford and Clausen) are just guys, someone needs to be willing to say that. I am.

The point is not to say that Bradford can't be better than Campbell or that Clausen can't be better than either of them. The argument that, by outbidding other desperate teams for the services of good but not great draft prospects, you can somehow land a franchise player, is IMO preposterous.

I don't think it matters whether Bradford or Clausen will be more successful in their careers than Campbell has been. I don't think it matters where someone else will take them. A marginal improvement in quarterback play, the kind people seem to be willing to jump through hoops for the mere opportunity of, just isn't worth that much. To be frank about it.

The difference between Peyton Manning and Jason Campbell, or the difference between Philip Rivers and Jason Campbell is worth using a top five draft choice on. The difference between Eli Manning and Campbell, or Carson Palmer and Campbell is probably not worth it.